IMPARȚIALITATE·INTEGRITATE·EFICIENȚĂ
September, 04th, 2014
No. 1246/VIII/3
The prosecutors within the National Anticorruption Directorate - the Section for Combating the Offenses Connected to Those of Corruption have ordered the start of the criminal action against:
HREBENCIUC VIOREL, a deputee, a member of the National Executive Comitee of a party (with management and decision power of the party), who was charged for the use of influence and authority in order to obtain money, goods or other undue benefits for himself or for another person, by an individual that holds a management position in party according to art.13 in Law no.78/2000.
There are reasonable clues and data according to which, upon the request of a person who, directly or indirectly, with the help of the members of his family or close aquintances, was controlling a trade company owning a TV station, the deputee Hrebenciuc Viorel interceded with civil servants from the National Audiovisual Council (C.N.A) in order to convince the institution representing the only regulating institution in the audiovisual field to reconsider their decision to withdraw the licence for the respective TV station. For this, the suspect Hrebenciuc Viorel used his influence and authority he had in his capacity as the member of the management structures of his party – as a member of the National Executive Commitee, the management and decision making organ. Hrebenciuc Viorel is a member of the Permanent Office of the Chamber of Deputees, a position that automatically makes him a member of the central management and decision organ of the party - the National Executive Commitee.
As a consequnce of the parliamentary Hrebenciuc Viorel using his influence and authority, the activity of CNA was disturbed as their office duties were poorly performed and the legal provisions in the audiovisual field were infringed. Thus, a TV station whose licence was correctly withdrawn continued to work. This had a negative impact upon the other TV operators, both with regards to unfair competition as well as the credibility of the activity of the only authority in charge with the monitoring and regulating of the audiovisual field and the applying of specific legislation.
We indicate that on the 17th of September 2013, C.N.A. decided with a majority of 7 to 4 (11 CNA members being present), to withdraw the audiovisual licence for the specific TV station. The reason for withdrawing the licence was the breaking of provisions of art.57 paragraph 1 letter b thesis 2 in Law no 504/2002 of audiovisual, meaning the respective TV station stopped the broadcast service programs for which the audiovisual license was granted for more than 96 hours for for any reason attributable to the owner, the only penalty provided by law in such a case being the withdrawal of the license.
After only 2 weeks, on the 1st of October 2013, C.N.A. revoked the earlier decision (6 voturi pentru şi 4 voturi împotrivă, din 10 membri prezenţi), stating only that the arguments contained in the complaint filed by the TV station were admitted without further conducting a technical analysis or to consider whether there is a point of view of the CNA experts to determine whether the allegations of the complaint are substantiated and legal.
From the analysis of materials on file, it was found that due to the aforementioned steps and unjustifiably, 3 of the CNA members who voted at the previous meeting to withdraw the license of the TV, during the 10th of January 2013 meeting, voted in the favor of TV station although the situation didn’t change, without having prepared any technical document within the institution to verify the arguments advanced in the appeal.
On the 4th of September 2014, the suspect was informed about the charges brought against her according to the provisions of art. 309 of the Criminal Code.
Other people are also investigated within this case.
It should be mentioned that the opening of the criminal investigation represents a stage of the criminal proceedings regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code, carried out in order to create procedural framework for gathering of evidence, an activity which cannot, under any circumstances, infringe the principle of presumption of innocence.
THE INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICE